[Red Barron]

One observation and maybe I am stating the obvious but he always has the stop below a moving average - for the trader stop either the 50 or the 200. In the AIG example it looks like he ignores the pivot low for some reason. I think it is because it is above both moving averages so it is dropped down below the MA which still has an acceptable % to the stop level.

This is still unfinished and I have many more examples from the GTAs to go through. But for example, in the S&P 500 recommendations from the March 2012 there was 37 stocks, of which 26 had a trader stop loss under their 50 day MA. So 11 didn't, and hence I don't think we can draw any conclusions on the importance of the moving averages for trader stop loss as yet. But my current assumption is that if the 50 day MA is close enough to the pivot low then it should be considered as well, but if it's not very close then it can be ignored and just the pivot low focused on.

Weinstein uses weekly frequencies in his book. Why do you instead use daily frequencies? I\'ve found that when I used the daily frequencies I get too many false breakouts and they don't give me the big picture for what a stock is truly doing. I don't want to be getting stopped out for a loss on 90% of the trades that I make. That is my fear by using the daily frequencies to draw lines of support and resistance b/c I feel they too often register just noise and don't reflect meaningful  and substantial directional moves that a stock is making. They don't allow for enough "play" of the stock. Granted if your stop loss gets tripped, and you had set it using daily frequency, you'll probably lose less $ than if a stop loss gets tripped that was set based on weekly frequency.